The Future Of Democracy: In Peril? - July 2020 - International Affairs Forum
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
February 2021
July 2020
January 2020
The
Future Of
Democracy:
In Peril?International Affairs Forum
Printed in the U.S.A.
A publication of the Center for International Relations
1629 K St. #300, Washington DC 22201
202/821-1832 email: editor@ia-forum.org
Managing Editor Dr. Dale Mineshima-Lowe
Senior Editors Sheritha Brace
Alexandra Gilliard
Traci Seltzer
Raja Sutherland
Editors Emily Luense
Katherine Lugo
Lisa Samson
Nicolette Teta
Cover Design Sam Ward (http://www.sam-
wardart.com/)
International Affairs Forum
Submit your Editorial or Essay to
editor@ia-forum.org
www.ia-forum.orgcontents
The Future of Democracy: In Peril?
4 Challenges Facing Democracy in the United States
Interview with Professor Michael Beckley
8 Misconceptions About the Crisis of Liberal Democracy in Europe
Hans Kundnani
11 The Future of Democracy
Professor Erica Frantz with Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Joseph Wright
15 Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
Professor Cleo Paskal
21 Authoritarianism in Iraq and the US
Interview with Abdulrazzaq Al-Saiedi
25 China and Democracy
Interview with Professor Carla Freeman
28 Looking at Democracy Across Four Countries
Interview with Dr. Remi Adekoya
34 Waiting or Pericles
Tim Bovy
38 Democracy is at the Crossroads of Victory and Failure
Dr. Tao Peng
43 Effects of Democratic Strains on Journalism
Interview with Professor j. Siguru Wahutu
47 From the Code of Hammurabi to a Revised Rules-Based World Order
James Stockmal51 Modi’s India: Toward an Authoritarian State?
Nathan Martins
53 References and NotesThe core values for the International Affairs Forum publication are: • We aim to publish a range of op-ed pieces, interviews, and short essays, alongside longer research and discussion articles that make a significant contribution to debates and offer wider insights on topics within the field; • We aim to publish content spanning the mainstream political spectrum and from around the world; • We aim to provide a platform where high quality student essays are published; • We aim to provide submitting authors with feedback to help develop and strengthen their manuscripts for future consideration. All of the solicited pieces have been subject to a process of editorial oversight, proofreading, and publisher’s preparation, as with other similar publications of its kind. We hope you enjoy this issue and encourage feedback about it, as it relates to a specific piece or as a whole. Please send your comments to: editor@ia-forum.org DISCLAIMER International Affairs Forum is a non-partisan publication that spans mainstream political views. Contributors express views independently and individually. The thoughts and opinions expressed by one do not necessarily reflect the views of all, or any, of the other contributors. The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the contributor alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of their employers, the Center for International Relations, its funders, or staff.
Challenges Facting Democracy in the United States
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
Challenges Facing Democracy in the United States
Interview with Professor Michael Beckley
Tufts University, United States
Over the last few years, the United States has seen numerous 70s. If this trend continues, the US government will essentially become
policies and government actions that has put into question the nothing more than an insurance company with a military.
strength of American democracy. Compounding this has been
growing polarization of the public as well as political parties. How Your recent piece in Foreign Affairs is titled: Rogue Superpower.
would you characterize the current state of the US democracy? Why This Could Be an Illiberal American Century. Would you
briefly discuss your concerns about the future of US democracy?
Not great. The United States is becoming a hollow democracy. The basic
institutions still exist, but the social fabric sustaining them is fraying. I am concerned about the future of liberal democratic governments
Partisan divisions have surged to levels not seen since the Civil War, worldwide for many reasons. My article focused on two factors that will
and the two major political parties have become divided by identity, not strain democracies in the coming decades: aging populations and rapid
just policy preferences. Rural whites overwhelmingly vote Republican automation. Public support for liberal democracy during the postwar
while most minorities and urban whites vote Democrat. This crude era has rested heavily on rising incomes for the working-class, which
tribalism leaves little room for compromise. As a result, policy-making in turn were largely the result of growing populations and job-creating
lurches between gridlock and partisan overreach, and the country has technologies. The postwar baby boom produced scores of young workers
entered a vicious cycle in which partisan gridlock undermines public trust and consumers, and the assembly line provided them with stable
in government, which incentivizes politicians to starve the government jobs. But now populations across the democratic world are aging and
of resources and authority, which leads to even poorer government shrinking, and machines are displacing workers. The basic bargain—work
performance, which leads to more hollowing out of the government. Many hard, support the liberal system, and trust that a rising economic tide will
statistics bear this trend out. One is non-defense discretionary spending, lift all boats—is breaking down. Extremism and xenophobia are filling the
a category that includes everything besides interest payments on the void.
debt and spending on entitlements and defense, which has shrunk to just
13 percent of the federal budget, down from 25 percent in the 1960s and The demographic outlook is more dire than most people realize. The
number of American working-age adults per senior citizen will drop from
International Affairs Forum
4-to-1 today to 3-to-1 by 2030, putting the country under enormous fiscal
The United States is becoming a hollow democracy. The basic stress. Other liberal democracies will suffer an even worse demographic
institutions still exist, but the social fabric sustaining them is fraying. crunch. Over the next 30 years, their working-age populations will shrink
by 12 percent, on average, making sustained economic growth almost
impossible. Meanwhile, the senior populations of the world’s liberal
democracies will expand by 57 percent, on average and spending on
4Challenges Facting Democracy in the United States
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
pensions and health care will double as a share of GDP. These countries as cracking down hard on domestic terrorism and regulating content
will not be able to borrow their way out of the resulting fiscal mess, on social media platforms. The insurrectionists that stormed the U.S.
because they already carried debts equal to 270 percent of GDP, on Capitol organized online and acted with a shocking sense of impunity,
average, before the COVID-19 pandemic plunged their balance sheets taking selfies and livestreaming their crimes. Now the U.S. government is
further into the red. Instead, they will have to cut entitlements for the hunting them down, and political support is growing for regulating social
elderly, slash social spending for the young, raise taxes, or increase media content.
immigration—all of which will likely produce political backlashes.
But the most obvious steps—electoral reforms that would empower a
Rapid automation will intensify the economic turmoil. History has shown centrist majority—have almost no chance of being enacted anytime
that technological revolutions create prosperity in the long run but force soon. These include laws that would automatically register people to
some workers into lower-wage jobs or unemployment in the short run— vote when they receive a drivers license or state ID; holding all elections
and the short run can last a lifetime. For the first 70 years of the Industrial on weekends and using open nonpartisan primaries and ranked-choice
Revolution in Britain, from 1770 to 1840, average wages stagnated and voting; and banning gerrymandering. The sad irony is that America is too
living standards declined, even as output per worker expanded by nearly polarized to pass reforms that would reduce polarization.
50 percent. The gains from mass mechanization during this time were
captured by tycoons, whose profit rates doubled. Now machines are once One exception may be policies designed to reduce economic inequality,
again eliminating jobs faster than displaced workers can retrain for new which is a deep driver of political extremism. Globalization and
ones, wages for low- and middle-skill workers are stagnating, and millions automation have fueled a geographic divergence of fortunes in the
of people—especially men without college degrees—are dropping out of United States: big cities with diversified economies have flourished while
the workforce. Many economists expect these trends to persist for several rural communities that depend on old-school manufacturing and mining
decades as labor-replacing technologies currently in development—such have decayed. That economic divergence has created a deep political
as robotic cars, stores, warehouses, and kitchens—are widely adopted. divide between “haves” and “have-nots.” Republican politicians have
spent years exacerbating that divide by blocking economic redistribution
Sluggish growth, enormous debt, stagnant wages, chronic policies while playing up cultural cleavages between rural and urban
unemployment, extreme inequality: any of these phenomena would areas, emphasizing racial and religious differences and inspiring fear
dampen faith in democracy, and some or all may strike simultaneously. of immigrants and big government. But now that Republicans have lost
In the 1930s, economic frustrations caused many people to reject the presidency and both houses of congress, some Republican leaders
democracy and embrace fascism or communism. Today, populists, seem to be searching for a new strategy and may ultimately adopt a
especially on the right, are ascendant across the democratic world. The more traditional economic populist platform, advocating things like jobs
United States needs to empower a centrist majority to stem this rising programs and expanded access to education and childcare. That switch
tide of polarization and extremism, but that will be increasingly hard could allow some redistribution to take place, which would help stem the
to do as rapid aging and automation push the world into a period of tide of rising economic inequality and the political polarization that goes
International Affairs Forum
unprecedented economic disruption. along with it.
What would you prescribe to strengthen democracy in the United Hong Kong has seen an erosion of its freedoms since Beijing
States and its role in world? imposed a security law on the city in June. Pro-democracy
supporters there are still hopeful for progress in spite of arrests and
There are some obvious reforms that already seem to be in motion, such the recent resignation of the entire pro-democracy caucus. What
5Challenges Facting Democracy in the United States
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
are your thoughts on the situation in Hong Kong and prospects for networks. Yet China is also facing a pronounced economic slowdown and
democracy there? a growing international backlash. So I worry that Beijing may become
tempted to lunge for geopolitical gain while its window of opportunity
Sadly, I think democracy in Hong Kong is doomed. Beijing is aggressively remains open over the next five to ten years. The United States obviously
enforcing its national security law, which makes Hong Kong the same still needs a long-term strategy for protracted competition. But first it
politically as any other Chinese city. The international community, needs a near-term strategy for navigating the coming decade.
and especially the United States and the United Kingdom, can and
should protect pro-democracy supporters by offering them asylum That strategy would (1) identify and prioritize the vital interests that are
and sanctioning Chinese leaders for their involvement in the crack most at risk in the short-term; and (2) explain how to achieve those
down. More broadly, Hong Kong’s democratic demise should fuel the objectives using the tools, partners, and institutions currently available—
consolidation of an emerging alliance of democracies dedicated to not those that could take years or decades to bring online. Militarily, that
protecting each other’s political systems from Chinese political warfare. means prioritizing denial strategies over those that require outright US
control of maritime East Asia, Taiwan over everywhere else, and rapid
Do you consider China’s authoritarian regime a major threat to procurement and deployment of munitions and basic platforms that can
democracies elsewhere? serve as shooters and sensors over long-term R&D. Economically,
the strategy would entail doubling down on aggressive unilateralism
Yes, China has spent billions of dollars on an “antidemocratic toolkit” in the short-term, with the hope that such measures will allow for
of NGOs, media outlets, think tanks, hackers, and bribes. Its main aim liberal multilateralism in the long-term. Negotiating a multilateral trade/
is not to win hearts and minds, but to reverse the international spread investment framework to “write the rules” or reform the WTO would be
of democracy and destroy America’s image abroad. In the future, new great, but the United States may not have time if China is ramping up
technologies will enable China to control its people and destabilize espionage, tech investment, and economic warfare. So the United States
democracies more efficiently than Mao Zedong could have imagined: may have to rely on aggressive use of investment restrictions, financial
a social-credit register to discipline citizens instantly; a digital silk road sanctions, tariffs, and embargoes to protect its economic competitiveness
to conduct espionage across Eurasia; malware to hamstring Western to blunt a surge of Chinese mercantilism. Diplomatically, the new strategy
companies; deep fakes to sow chaos in democratic elections; and an would rely on ad hoc coalitions focused on particular issues and probably
array of advanced military capabilities to try to intimidate Taiwan into involving some unsavory partners instead of formal institutions. Instead
abandoning its democratic institutions and submit to mainland rule. of running US China policy through formal alliances and the United
Nations, the United States should organize and lead a “T-12” to secure
What would you recommend to the incoming Biden administration technology, a “D-10” to protect democratic elections, a repurposed Quad
for US relations with China? to coordinate maritime security, and a series of bilateral partnerships to
help China’s neighbors balance against Chinese maritime and economic
Think short-term. Many experts think the United States and China are expansion.
International Affairs Forum
running a “superpower marathon” that may last a century. But I think
the sharpest phase of that competition will be a decadelong sprint in the
2020s. The reason is that China has entered a particularly perilous period
as a rising power: it has gained the capability to disrupt the existing order,
but its window to act may be narrowing. The balance of power is shifting
in Beijing’s favor in important areas of US-Chinese competition, such
as the Taiwan Strait and the struggle over global telecommunications
6Challenges Facting Democracy in the United States
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
Michael Beckley is an associate professor of political
science at Tufts University and a Jeane Kirkpatrick
Visiting Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.
His research on great power competition has received
awards from the American Political Science Association
and the International Studies Association and been
featured by numerous media including the Financial
Times, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, the New York
Times, NPR, and the Washington Post.
Previously, Prof. Beckley worked for Harvard’s Kennedy
School of Government, the U.S. Department of Defense,
the RAND Corporation, and the Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace. He continues to advise offices
within the U.S. Intelligence Community and U.S.
Department of Defense.
His first book, Unrivaled: Why America Will Remain the
World’s Sole Superpower, was published in 2018 by Cornell
University Press.
International Affairs Forum
7Misconceptions About the Crisis of Liberal Democracy in Europe
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
Misconceptions About the Crisis of Liberal Democracy in Europe
Hans Kundnani
Chatham House, United Kingdom
I
n the last few years, there has been much discussion about a crisis of What matters is not just the degree but also the kind of polarization.
liberal democracy throughout the West – that is, in Europe as well as in The focus on polarization is exacerbated by a tendency to look at Europe
the United States. Although there is a widespread agreement that there through the prism of America especially since the election of Donald
is a crisis, there has been little agreement about how to understand Trump as president in 2016. Polarization is certainly a problem in the
it. Much of the debate has focused on the rise of populism – though United States. Since the 1960s, Americans have gradually divided into
there has been much disagreement about whether to understand the two different groups– liberals and conservatives. These two groups
phenomenon as a cause of the crisis or as a symptom of a crisis that has have increasingly also mapped on to the two main political parties in the
different, deeper causes – and on polarization as a threat to democracy. United States – Democrats and Republicans – which now represent what
Lilianna Mason has called “mega-identities”. Hyper-partisan politics have
The discussion about the crisis of liberal democracy in Europe, made political compromise impossible and have paralyzed independent
particularly in think tanks and in the mainstream media, has become institutions like the Supreme Court.
confused because of two particular errors. First, many centrist analysts
have wanted to believe that it is possible to think about the crisis in an Many analysts of the crisis of liberal democracy in Europe imagine that
apolitical way without an awareness of the normative assumptions they something similar is happening in Europe, but it is not. The situation
are making about what a good democracy looks like – assumptions that in Europe is actually quite different, as Sheri Berman and I show in an
reflect their own political preferences. Second, the crisis has tended to be essay for the Journal of Democracy. In reality, in Europe, it is not so much
seen through the prism of the American experience, though in reality the polarization and partisanship that have led to democratic decay and the
situation in Europe is very different than in the United States, and yet in rise of populism, but party convergence and diminishing partisanship – in
some ways is actually the opposite. other words, the opposite of the situation in the United States.
Everyone thinks they know intuitively what a good democracy looks like. During the same period that American politics has become more
But defining it is actually far from straightforward and involves normative polarized, European politics have actually become less polarized. Centre-
International Affairs Forum
assumptions that are not often made explicit or thought through carefully. left parties and centre-right parties have converged ideologically and
In particular, centrists tend to like consensus and dislike polarization, but have become increasingly difficult to differentiate from each other. A good
it is far from clear that polarization is always a bad thing in a democracy. example of this dynamic is Germany, wherein the last two decades the
Many, particularly those further to the left and to the right, see some kinds Social Democrats have moved to the right on economic issues and the
of polarization not just as a good thing but as the essence of democracy. Christian Democrats moved to the left on cultural issues. On the basis of
8Misconceptions About the Crisis of Liberal Democracy in Europe
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
reality different, but also because polarization cut across the party system
in the UK, which is in part what made a referendum necessary. Since
Shifting voting patterns in Europe illustrate the way that partisanship
2016, party politics has become very fluid. For example, in the 2019
is not entrenched in the way it is in the United States – far from it.
election, working-class voters in the north of England switched to the
Party identities have weakened, not strengthened.
Conservative party in large numbers.
this centrist consensus, they have governed together in a grand coalition Thus, if one looks carefully at developments in Europe and puts them
in three of the last four electoral periods, led by Chancellor Angela in historical context, it becomes clear that the story is very different
Merkel. from the United States. In fact, America’s hyper-partisan politics looks
less like Europe today than Europe in the earlier era of “milieu parties”,
At a first glance, this convergence may seem like a good thing in which is sometimes seen as the heyday of democracy in Europe.
democratic terms – especially if one has America’s dysfunctional hyper- To complicate things even more, there are important differences. In
partisan politics in mind. But convergence can also threaten democracy particular, polarization at that time was focused at least as much on
– in particular, if parties move away from voter preferences, and a economic questions as much as cultural ones (though cultural questions
“representation gap” emerges and creates a context in which extremist also mattered –after all, some “milieu parties” were even based on
parties can thrive. This is exactly what has happened in Europe. Such confessional identities).
parties, which see the mainstream parties as a bloc or cartel, have
surged in the last decade or so. This, in turn, forces centre-left and This illustrates that even extreme polarization does not necessarily
centre-right parties to close ranks even further and so the problem gets threaten democracy. In particular, it depends on whether polarization
worse. In particular, it is far-right parties that have benefited. revolves around cultural or economic issues. As Prof. Claus Offe has
shown, polarization on economic issues is less threatening because they
Shifting voting patterns in Europe illustrate the way that partisanship are easier to compromise or bargain over than cultural issues. Whether
is not entrenched in the way it is in the United States – far from it. polarization threatens democracy also depends on whether voters accept
Party identities have weakened, not strengthened. In particular, as the legitimacy of other parties. For example, British politics were very
social democratic parties have abandoned left-wing economic policies polarized in the era of Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s, but the outcome
and embraced neoliberalism, working class voters have abandoned of elections was never questioned as it is in the United States today.
them, particularly for far-right parties like the Rassemblement National
(formerly the Front National) in France or the Alternative für Deutschland This analysis of the liberal democracy in Europe, understood on its own
in Germany. This is not the polarized politics of America but rather terms rather than through the prism of the United States, leads to two
something much more fluid and dynamic. conclusions. The first is about polarization. Centrists want to further
International Affairs Forum
reduce polarization, but this would make the crisis of liberal democracy
The United Kingdom is a complicated in-between case. At a first glance, worse. It would be better if centre-left parties moved back to the left,
it looks a lot like the United States – after all, it too has become polarized especially on economic policy, and centre-right parties need moved back
by the question of membership of the European Union. Brexit has been to the right – in other words, more polarization. This would once again
widely seen as an expression of populism, analogous to Trump. But this create real alternatives in the centre ground of politics in Europe. In
is misleading not only because the issues, centred on the EU itself, are in particular, having real alternatives on economic policy would reduce the
9Misconceptions About the Crisis of Liberal Democracy in Europe
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
salience of cultural issues. Hans Kundnani is Senior Research Fellow in the
Europe Programme at Chatham House.
The second conclusion is that centrism is as much a part of the crisis of Before joining Chatham House in 2018, he was
liberal democracy in Europe as populism. In particular, it is necessary to Senior Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall
recognize that there is also another, almost opposite threat to democracy Fund of the United States and Research Director at
the European Council on Foreign Relations.
– technocracy or “post-democracy”– to which much populism is a
reaction. Technocracy is a particular problem in Europe because the EU He is also Associate Fellow at the Institute for
is the ultimate form of technocratic governance and produces Eurosceptic German Studies at Birmingham University. In
populism. Although there is much heterogeneity in populism in Europe, 2016 he was a Bosch Public Policy Fellow at the
Transatlantic Academy in Washington DC.
as Prof. Philip Manow has shown, nearly all populists are Eurosceptic –
albeit in different ways. He is the author of The Paradox of German Power
(2014), which has been translated into German,
In other words, it is impossible to talk about the crisis of liberal democracy Italian, Japanese, Korean and Spanish.
in Europe without talking about the EU. Many centrists see the EU in
He studied German and Philosophy at Oxford
rather simplistic terms – in particular, as a “community of democracies” University and Journalism at Columbia University in
that is under threat and therefore needs to be defended. This overlooks New York, where he was a Fulbright Scholar.
the way that the EU was always about constraining democracy through a
system of rules. In that sense, the EU (as opposed to its member states)
is liberal rather than democratic. Centrists who are serious about the
quality of democracy in Europe – as opposed to just winning the fight
against populism – need to engage with these difficult questions.
International Affairs Forum
10The Futue of Democracy
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
The Future of Democracy
Professor Erica Frantz
with Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Joseph Wright
Michigan State University, United States
O
n January 6 of this year, an armed mob stormed the United but in other instances it ushered in a transition to authoritarianism, as
States Capitol building in a last-ditch effort to challenge the in Bangladesh, Serbia, and Turkey. Perhaps most notably, a number of
2020 presidential election results, which saw incumbent these declines occurred in wealthier and more established democracies,
President Donald Trump lose. Despite the fact that experts and such as the US, which scholars have typically considered robust against
officials deemed the race to be free and fair, Trump repeatedly issued democratic backsliding.2
unsubstantiated claims to the contrary and called on his supporters
to take action. While tragic, the deadly insurrection that took place in To be fair, democracy is still the dominant form of government around
response to these calls was in many ways unsurprising. It marked the the globe, and recent democratic transitions in Armenia, Burkina Faso,
culmination of a prolonged period of democratic backsliding in the US that and Malaysia should give some cause for optimism. That said, the rapid
began with Trump’s 2016 election. All signs indicate that democracy in the pace of democratization that followed the end of the Cold War has clearly
US will rebound, at least in the short term, with the assumption of power slowed down. From 2000 to 2009, the number of transitions to democracy
of a new leadership. That said, fissures remain. Importantly, the Trump was nearly three times the number of democratic collapses (twenty-five
era makes clear that no democracy is invulnerable to authoritarianism in cases versus nine cases, respectively). From 2010 to 2019, however,
3
today’s times, even those that appear consolidated. democratic transitions slowed to twenty-one cases, whereas democratic
breakdowns increased to sixteen. This suggests that while democracy
This experience in the US is not isolated. Around the globe, democracies still has the edge over authoritarianism, the tide may be turning.
appear to be in crisis and redirected to a path of authoritarianism. Notable
examples include countries as diverse as Benin, Hungary, and Nicaragua. Two trends are important to better understand what is happening. The
Such trends have prompted many to sound the alarm bell that democracy first is a change in the method through which democracies are falling
is under threat. In its 2020 report, for example, the watchdog organization apart. Whereas, historically, coups usually toppled democracies, today’s
Freedom House stated that 2019 was the fourteenth consecutive democracies are increasingly collapsing from within, through power
International Affairs Forum
year it documented a decline in global freedom. Many of the declines
1
witnessed in recent years reflected a deepening of authoritarianism,
as in Azerbaijan, Burundi, and Rwanda. Others, however, captured a Around the globe, democracies appear to be in crisis and redirected
deterioration in the quality of democracy, as in India, Poland, and Brazil. to a path of authoritarianism.
In those instances, the deterioration left democracy weakened yet intact,
11The Futue of Democracy
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
grabs on the part of their elected leadership—a process referred to as Contrast this with recent experience in Venezuela. In 1999, Hugo Chavez
authoritarianization. Concurrently, we are also seeing a change in the assumed the presidency, having won democratic elections the year
types of political parties supporting incumbent leaders in democracies. before. Chavez won free and fair elections again in 2000, continuing
Traditional political parties appear to be on the decline, with democratic Venezuela’s long tradition of (at times flawed) democracy. In the years
leaders increasingly coming to power backed by personalist political to come, however, Chavez pursued a number of actions that slowly
parties. These parties exist to promote and further their leaders’ pushed the country toward dictatorship. In 2004, he backed legislation
careers, as opposed to advancing policy and personnel choices. This that increased the size of the Supreme Court and allowed judges to
is consequential given that elites in personalist parties are less likely to be dismissed by majority vote, enabling Chavez allies to take over the
push back against incumbent power grabs than their counterparts in more Supreme Court and other lower courts. The government published a
programmatic and institutionalized parties. Thus, the election of leaders list that year, as well, of tens of thousands of citizens who had signed
supported by personalist political parties paves the way for successful a recall petition, leading to their dismissal from public employment
power grabs and ultimately authoritarianization. Together, these two and loss of access to welfare benefits. It ratcheted up its targeting of
trends shed light on how the contemporary wave of democratic erosion is the media too, passing laws that restricted reporting and engaging in
occurring and inform our understanding of the actions and developments actions to intimidate reporters. By the time of the 2005 election, Chavez
that serve as red flags that is democracy is in danger. opponents no longer encountered a fair playing field, prompting five
opposition parties to boycott it. Not surprisingly, Chavez supporters
The rise of authoritarianization ended up winning all the country’s parliamentary seats. Chavez
continued to monopolize power in the years after, ushering in a period
The method through which democracies fall apart has changed of authoritarianism that persists today under his successor Nicolas
dramatically since the end of the Cold War. Historically, coups were the Maduro. The downfall of Venezuela’s democracy took place over a long
dominant mode of democratic collapse, often with military troops storming period of time. It was a slow and incremental transition, so much so that
a presidential palace and asserting control. Today, internal takeovers by determining the specific moment it occurred is difficult to assess.
democratically elected leaders—referred to as authoritarianizations—
have displaced coups as the most common means through which These examples of democratic collapse in Chile and Venezuela reveal
democracies transition to dictatorship. the key ways in which coups and authoritarianizations differ. Whereas
coups are risky (with about half failing) and require careful planning,
These two methods of democratic failure differ from each other in authoritarianizations are fairly easy to accomplish. They involve the
important ways. Take the coup in Chile in 1973. On September 11 of that incumbent government leveraging its access to power to push through
year, the Chilean military staged a coup against then-President Salvador a series of rule and personnel changes, culminating in a situation in
Allende, who had won democratic elections in 1970. To do so, it took which opponents can no longer mount an effective challenge. Because
International Affairs Forum
over La Moneda, the presidential palace, and attacked until Allende authoritarianizations usually occur over a drawn-out period and entail a
eventually took his own life. The coup launched General Agosto Pinochet multipronged approach to consolidating control, they are more difficult to
and a military junta into power, establishing a dictatorship that lasted until push back against than coups are. There is no single moment or event
1989. The demise of Chile’s democracy was abrupt and easy to identify, that opponents can mobilize and rally against in protest.
occurring over the course of a single day.
These advantages, coupled with a post-Cold War political climate that
12The Futue of Democracy
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
favors the appearance of liberalism and condemns coups, have made Greater personalism in the leader’s support party is harmful to democracy
authoritarianizations a more desirable method for would-be autocrats to because incumbent power grabs are more likely to be successful
establish control. The data bear this out. From 1946 to 1989, 64 percent
4
in these contexts. In personalist parties, elites have less bargaining
of democracies fell apart via coup, with authoritarianizations occurring power with respect to the leader and lack the history of interactions that
only infrequently. By the 1990s, coups declined slightly in popularity,
5
make working together easier. The collective action costs they face in
comprising 54 percent of democratic failures; authoritarianizations, challenging a leadership power grab are higher as a result. Leaders in
by contrast, gathered steam and made up 38 percent of democratic personalist parties are also more likely to fill high positions in the party
failures. Fast forward to the 2010s, where only 36 percent of democracies with loyalists and individuals from their personal network than with those
transitioned to dictatorship through a coup and a whopping 64 percent from the political establishment who have government experience. The
collapsed via authoritarianization, as in Serbia, Benin, Nicaragua, and careers of elites in personalist parties are therefore closely linked with the
Turkey. fortunes of the leader, giving them more incentive to continue to support
the leader even in the face of actions that subvert democracy. Leaders
The data illustrate that authoritarianizations are now the most common in personalist political parties are less likely to express commitment
way that democracies fall apart. Given their considerable advantages, to democratic institutions, as well, because they typically have less
they are likely to remain the method of choice for would-be autocrats in exposure to how democratic politics works than leaders from more
the years to come, as well. institutionalized parties do, who often have to rise up the ranks of the
party apparatus to secure their positions. For these reasons, where
The rise in personalist political parties democratic leaders govern with the support of more personalist parties,
incumbent power grabs are more likely to be successful.
This evolution in the method through which democracies are collapsing
is occurring in tandem with a change in the types of political parties Leaders backed by personalist political parties are increasingly gaining
supporting incumbent democratic leaders. Today’s democratic leaders are office in today’s democracies, as examples from Hungary, Venezuela,
increasingly backed by personalist political parties, as opposed to more and Turkey illustrate, and their election helps to explain the contemporary
institutionalized and programmatic political parties. This matters because wave of backsliding and reversions to authoritarianism we are witnessing.
research shows that democracies are at a greater risk of backsliding
when leaders supported by personalist political parties govern them. 6
Concluding remarks
Personalist political parties are parties that “democratically elected The two trends discussed here highlight easily observable warning signs
leaders create, which are used as vehicles to advance leaders’ personal suggestive of a democracy under threat. For one, today’s democracies
political careers or instead further party power over policy and personnel are increasingly falling apart from within, due to multipronged power
International Affairs Forum
choices.” Levels of personalism in political parties can vary both across
7
grabs on the part of incumbent leaders. These power grabs, in turn, are
parties (the governing party of Ukraine exhibits high personalism, for being facilitated by the rise of personalist political parties. The election
example, while the governing party of Australia exhibits low personalism) of leaders backed by such parties essentially plants the groundwork for
and within parties over time (as evidenced by the increase in levels of democratic erosion in the years to come.
personalism in the Republican Party in the US under Trump). 8
Slowing down the speed of the contemporary autocratic wave requires
13The Futue of Democracy
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
thinking backward and contemplating more seriously why voters are Erica Frantz (Ph.D., UCLA, 2008) is an associate
professor in Political Science at Michigan State
attracted to leaders supported by personalist parties to begin with. After
University. From 2011 to 2015, she was an assistant
all, an increasing number of today’s autocrats were at one point voted professor in Political Science at Bridgewater State
into office in free and fair contests, indicating that voters supported their University, and from 2008 to 2011 she worked as
ascension to power. Coming to terms with why ordinary citizens are an analyst at the Institute for Physical Sciences. Her
research and teaching interests include authoritarian
now more drawn to such leaders therefore warrants greater attention.
politics, democratization, conflict, and development.
Moreover, while the evidence suggests that traditional political parties in She is particularly interested in the security and
many developed democracies have lost their popularity in recent years, it policy implications of autocratic rule.
is less clear why they have been replaced by personalist vehicles instead
of new policy-based political organizations. 9
At this point, one can only speculate about these things. It may be that
economic changes have made voters disillusioned with the traditional
establishment, leading to the rising popularity of leaders whose support
group comes from outside of it. Likewise, it may be that the global rise
in the elite rich has made it easier for aspiring politicians to found and
maintain their own launching organizations. Regardless, gaining a better
sense of these dynamics will be critical to pushing back against the
contemporary democratic relapse.
International Affairs Forum
14Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
Professor Cleo Paskal
Chatham House, United Kingdom
“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every their pockets and paying back the ‘friends’ who got them elected. The
city or house divided against itself shall not stand.” first might be more appropriate for a presidential system, and the second
- Matthew 12:25 for a prime ministerial/parliamentary system. Though both require strong
access to information protections and a free press to curb excesses.
D
emocracy is a delicate machine composed of many moving Political parties
parts: electoral systems, campaign financing regulations,
districting committees, media laws, election commissions, and Another major variable in designing an effective democracy is population
myriad other pieces each pull in their own directions. In a healthy size. Many who come from larger countries assume the words ‘multiparty’
democracy, the parts mesh like well oiled gears and the whole moves and ‘democracy’ are inextricably linked, and yet that form of democratic
forward, from election to governance to election to governance. government is relatively recent.
But sometimes bits break down, the wrong part pulls the machine too Often, Commonwealth nations model their parliaments on the one in
much in one direction, or a gear is weak and cracks under the strain, and the UK and yet, originally, Members of Parliament at Westminster were
adjustments have to be made. For example, in 2017, it was becoming elected as independents. Much later on they formed loose alliances.
clear that large amounts of money were being donated to Australia’s And it was only in the 19th century, with constituencies so large that
political parties from funders tied to China, raising questions about the personally knowing one’s member of parliament was unlikely, that rigid
effect that could have on policies (unlike the United States, Australia political parties as we now know them came to prominence.
allowed unlimited foreign funds to go to political parties). Not only did
that potentially undermine national security, it undermined democracy – As a result of the change, voters were asked to choose not between
as parties might be tempted to ignore the desires of their voters in favor people, but between a predetermined set of positions put forth by those
of the desires of their funders. And so, in a win for democracy, the laws who ran the parties. Too often the positions existed just to show how
were changed. different one party was from the other. If one party liked ice cream, the
other had to hate it.
International Affairs Forum
Additionally, parts that might work in one context, might not work in
another. For example, countries with term limits say that is a way of The development of political parties meant that the system went from a
precluding individuals from amassing too much power. Countries without consensus model, in which the broad goal was to reach agreement with
term limits say that offering politicians the hope they might be reelected as many others as possible, to an oppositional model in which the goal
is a better way of ensuring that leaders don’t just spend their terms lining was to beat the other side, regardless of the cost to the nation.
15Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
The potentially corrosive nature of political parties was clear from the Democracies with large population sizes are not going to do away with
start. In the United States, the first President, George Washington, was political parties. Their destructive influences will need to be mitigated,
not a member of a political party and thought them such a danger to part-by-part, through transparency, accountability, and vigilance – the
democracy and the state that he devoted much of his Farewell Address very things that large western democracies have been telling the rest of
(1796) to warning against them. the world for decades.
[The ‘spirit of party’] serves always to distract the public councils Population size and democracy
and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community
with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of However, there are some countries in which the “potent engines” of
one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. political parties are not necessary, and would even more demonstrably
It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds impede democracy. They are countries with populations small enough for
a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels constituencies to know their candidates.
of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are
subjected to the policy and will of another. There are a large number of countries with populations under 500,000.
That size means an assembly of 100 representatives would be elected
[…] However combinations or associations of the above description by 100 constituencies of around 5000 people each – small enough for
may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the voters to get to know their candidates, and for the candidates to know the
course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which priorities of the electorate.
cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert
the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of There is a range of examples of such ‘nonpartisan democracies’
government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have (though some do have informal political groupings). They include
lifted them to unjust dominion. Tuvalu, Federated States of Micronesia, and Nauru. Also, American
Samoa, the Falkland Islands, Guernsey, and the Canadian territory of
President Washington proved prophetic. Not only are there increasing Northwest Territories. Globally, many municipalities (some much larger
concerns about foreign influence, the American political system has than 500,000) are run without political parties, additionally, governors of
become so antagonistic it has forced some of the most public spirited Japanese prefectures aren’t members of political parties, the Nebraska
and good-hearted leaders to become oppositional, and led many fine state legislature and a couple of Swiss Cantons have nonpartisan
candidates to withdraw from political life for fear of the cost to their family, elections. In many other governance structures as well, the nonpartisan
friends, and personal reputation. system is the norm. It would be difficult to imagine running a company,
for example, if the board was formally and rigidly divided between two or
more factions. Yes, they are all pretty small, but that’s the point. If working
with a country under a certain size, different options are available and
International Affairs Forum
...there are some countries in which the “potent engines” of political should be considered.
parties are not necessary, and would even more demonstrably
impede democracy. They are countries with populations small The effect of introducing political parties into polities with relatively
enough for constituencies to know their candidates. small populations was made clear with two recent cases. In one case,
at the insistence of the ‘international community’, political parties were
introduced, in another they weren’t (the term for political systems with
16Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
no political parties is ‘nonpartisan democracy’). The resulting differences Things became even more fraught as Beijing backed a favored political
were marked. party, and political unrest grew, with Nasheed being pushed out of power
and arrested, the Supreme Court getting involved, an assassination
Maldives. The Maldives is an islands nation in the Indian Ocean with attempt, a state of emergency, and more. The situation is more stable
a population of around 500,000. It has a presidential system, with a now, but in many ways the Maldivian introduction of political parties
unicameral legislature of 87 members. Under the previous system with quickly resulted in many of the challenges to real democracy described
no formal political parties, the same man, President Maumoon Abdul by Washington.
Gayoom, held power from 1978 to 2008. Opposition grew and advocates,
both outside and inside the country, pushed for a multiparty political Nunavut. So, is there a democratic alternative to multiparty systems?
system. Eventually the President initiated a reform process. Informal One example of another path taken can be found in Northern Canada.
political parties formed, but progress was slow and there were arrests In 1999, the territory of Nunavut was created. It has an area of around 2
of opposition figures. In 2004 and 2005, there were violent protests and million km2 (if it was a country, it would be the 15th largest on the planet),
an attempted take-over by the opposition. Political parties were legally with a population of around 36,000. The majority are Inuit who have
allowed starting in 2005. retained strong cultural traditions.
Foreign interest in internal politics in the Maldives increased, with some Instead of adopting the oppositional multiparty system Ottawa was
nations favoring certain parties over others. Under President Gayoom, promoting, the people of Nunavut decided to build on their own
Maldivian Islam was largely moderate, in spite of attempted influence by cultural strengths. With millennia of experience in self-governing local
more radical outsiders. In the confused and tense period of transition, communities through discussions guided by elders and local leaders,
pro-Islamic extremist took advantage of the opening to target foreign they adopted a “community of communities” structure.
tourists, and twelve were injured in a bombing.
They rejected the multiparty system and instead chose nonpartisan
In 2008, the country held its first multiparty elections. After a run-off, a democracy, in which each member was elected as an independent.
new president, President Mohamed Nasheed, was elected. President The goal, according to the government, is to foster and implement the
Nasheed was a moderate, however, because of the oppositional structure traditional “values of maximum cooperation, effective use of leadership
of party systems, bigger parties often look to smaller parties for support, resources and common accountability.” The government also has
rather than working with another one of the bigger parties (even though an advisory council of elders to help ensure traditional culture and
if the two big parties worked together, it would theoretically better reflect knowledge is considered in political decision-making.
the will of the electorate). Looking to smaller parties means that marginal,
and sometimes extreme, voices can carry disproportioned weight. So far, the structure has been a success. There has been no painful
tearing of the social fabric, and democracy is vibrant and healthy.
President Nasheed took a small puritanical Islamic party (one that The main drawback is that decisions can take longer than in majority
International Affairs Forum
supported amputations for theft and the death penalty for those who controlled multiparty systems because reaching real consensus can be
convert away from Islam), into the ruling coalition giving it effective a painstaking process. However, once the decisions are reached, they
power in governance that was much greater than its actual support in the represent the will of the majority and are stable. There is no seesaw of
country. Already, in just its first election, the will of the Maldivian people policy that is sometimes found in multiparty systems as the winds of
has lost out to the imperatives of the political party system. politics change.
17Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
A comparison between some of the drivers of a fictional multiparty For real democracy, every part of the machine, from campaign financing
democracy and a fictional nonpartisan democracy shows stark regulations to term limits, needs to be assessed to make sure that the
differences. In the reductionist example below (pg. 19), the checks and most relevant, effective and appropriate pieces are being used to build
balances in the multiparty democracy are not working well, and the a system that will deliver real stability, security and, yes, democracy.
nonpartisan democracy is working as it should. The idea is just to show In some countries, that might mean political parties. In others, political
how this one difference in the ‘gears’ of democracy – political parties or parties could severely damage democracy. Just ask George Washington.
nonpartisan democracy - can push other levers.
Of course, as with every system, there are drawbacks to nonpartisan
democracy. In terms of domestic politics, for example, it motivates elected
officials to bargain with each other for perks for their ridings (“I’ll fund
your bridge if you fund my road”). However, in countries with a small
population, it tends to mitigate against some of the excesses described
by Washington – which as seen with the Maldives can cascade quite
quickly.
Summary
There is a tendency among development agencies and foreign affairs
professionals to assume that democracy is actually pronounced
“multipartydemocracy”. This has led to some disastrous interventions in
countries introducing, or reintroducing, more inclusive political systems.
One of the current targets on that list is the Kingdom of Tonga, population
around 100,000, where countries like Australia and New Zealand are
actively pushing for political parties. And, in the case of New Zealand,
Wellington seems to have already picked out its favorite party – the one
that will deliver what it thinks is best for New Zealand.
Citizens of larger countries might mean well, but their political models
are designed for different population sizes. In the UK, each single
constituency averages around the entire population of the Kingdom of
Tonga. The strengths of Tonga – the direct democracy of personally
International Affairs Forum
knowing one’s candidates, of every citizen being only one or two people
removed from their representative – do not exist in larger countries,
so their people find it hard to imagine another way even though they
are often the ones driving “democratization” programs. And that is how
opportunities are missed.
18Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself is Brought to Desolation
International Affairs Forum - February 2021
Multiparty democracy Nonpartisan democracy Multiparty democracy Nonpartisan democracy
Primary loyalty- To the political party. To the electorate. Funding Comes largely via party, Self or community funded,
responsibility of the elected giving party leaders meaning it is more difficult
member If rejected by one If the local electorate does enormous control over who for big flows of outside
constituency, a loyal party not support their local gets to run. money to come in undetected.
member can be supported by candidate, their time in
the party and found a safe politics is usually over.
seat elsewhere. Gives opportunities for Constituencies are small
outside interests (including enough to know what the
Style of politics Goal to beat opposition. Goal to reach consensus. corporations and foreign person is really like (and
governments) to funnel where their money comes
Policies tend to reflect the Policies tend to reflect the money through the party to from).
will of the party. will of the electorate. advance certain agenda.
Rewarded for effective Rewarded for building up the Type of candidate rewarded People interested in People who can deliver for
attacks on opposition. constituency. by the system power and willing to use their constituency – often by
oppositional and potentially reaching consensus both in
Candidate focused on Candidate focused on destructive means to get it. their constituencies and in
understanding politics in understanding politics in While some will join in a parliament.
political party. constituency. genuine desire to advance the
greater good, the system may
Willing to align with The majority rules. make it difficult.
marginal parties even if they
don’t represent the majority
sentiment of the country. Elected (or put forth) due to Elected due to status/
status in the party. popularity in their
constituency.
Legal/economic/policy/etc Progress/change may be
changes can happen very slower, but is generally more
quickly if there is a majority in alignment with the will of
government or change of the people and more stable.
party in power.
International Affairs Forum
19You can also read
